Editorial: A patient’s medical file is inviolate

Monday, March 15, 1999 | 10:40 a.m.

When Congress passed legislation in 1996 to help workers keep their health insurance when they change their jobs, a little-noticed provision on privacy rights was inserted into the bill. The bipartisan legislation, authored by Sens. Nancy Kassebaum, R-Kan., and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., set an August 1999 deadline for Congress to pass a medical privacy law.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., is the chief sponsor of the Medical Information Privacy and Security Act. The legislation definitely is needed. Leahy notes that privacy protections for medical records now are less than those that exist for a customer's video rental records.

Leahy's bill would require the patient to give his consent before medical information could be used for his own treatment and the payment of his claims. More importantly, the patient also would have to give separate permission before medical information could be given to another person or company, such as a drug company trolling for new customers. Insurance plans have no business selling information from our medical files to the highest bidder.

In addition, the legislation would curtail access within the companies that have this medical information. People not directly involved with a patient's health benefits would no longer have access to the individual's records.

The legislation applies not only to the written records in your doctor's file, but also to any electronic records as well. The benefits of being able to link with other people around the world via a computer are amazing. But at the same time this ability to communicate with others instantly can be dangerous and allows sensitive information, such as a patient's medical records, to be given to those who have no business seeing them.

Congress should pass this legislation and ensure that Americans feel secure that the only people who know about their medical history are those who actually are involved in their treatment.